Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

Eh, I was under the impression that what you said was more or less the case, although I'm not sure about the 'true' or 'false' aspect of it. Also, with VNs, I guess there's more than one option influencing the story (more than Higurashi, I think? I've never played a VN, but I was under the impression you get to change the situation more/provide more input to the situation than Higurashi?).

Spoiler for kind of long speculation on Schrodinger's cat:

My impression of things:

Schrodinger's cat: 'The cat is conceptually both dead and alive, as neither has been proven. Upon looking in the box to confirm it one way or another, one can confirm whether it is dead or alive- however, by doing so, one could also influence the experiment in some way'.

VN: The several different outcomes of the pathways (stemming from the same situation) are conceptually possible at the same time, as none of them have been proven to be true or false (the ones that happen or not). Upon seeking to confirm whether one outcome is the the case or another one is, one can 'confirm' that it is the case- however, in doing so, one would have influenced the path.

I don't know completely how VNs work (as I've never played one, much less Air), but to use an example... say in Air, there's Misuzu's good end, Kano's good end, and Minagi's good end. They're all conceptually possible at the same time, but if you 'seek to prove that Misuzu's good end is the case' (make the situation into Misuzu's good end, I guess), then you'd be aiming for Misuzu's good end- therefore, you have a conclusion, but one that's been brought about by your actiosn and desire to confirm/conclude whether it is one ending or another. (Although, confirming the ending of a visual novel isn't really as concrete as confirming the living state of a cat).

I think that the examples you gave for Higurashi are good. By seeking to confirm whether a good end was possible, I guess you could say Rika undertook the necessary actions in order to do so, thus influencing her destiny. The reboot just gives her different situations and the like each time. It's probably the same for Battler, too?

So, Higurashi: The different outcomes of a situation (in a world) are conceptually possible at the same time, as none of them have been proven to happen or not. Upon seeking to confirm whether one outcome is the the case or another one is, one can 'confirm' that it is the case- however, in doing so, one would have influenced the path.

I guess Rika seeking to confirm whether the Yamainu and Takano were behind things would have influenced the path, for instance. Or, as aforementioned, simply Rika seeking to confirm whether she could influence things to get a good end. It's probably a bit different, but I think there are similarities.

... But I could just be getting confused. ._.; Someone please correct me if I'm wrong... In any case, what you said sounds right to me.

I'm glad I'll never have to study quantum physics: if I can't even get my head around Schrodinger's cat, I wonder what I'd make of the rest of it (not to mention all the formulae)...

Ah, and of course: Schrodinger's cat was mentioned in the poem by Bernkastel for Minagoroshi-hen:

Higurashi is almost like us watching Rika play a live VN. We don't actually get direct input on the situation, but Rika does.

Otherwise, I was thinking more along the lines that Schrodinger's cat applies only to, say, the time before the Higurashi reboot (so that Rika has not made any moves on the playing field yet), but after Rika makes her first move, Schrodinger's cat does not apply any more, as her actions would have influenced (yes, that word) the outcome in some way, thus making one "END" (as I call it, eheheh) more likely than the others.

Similarly, during the time the box containing the cat is closed, Schrodinger's cat would apply, but if you took the box and threw it into a deadly wildfire, Schrodinger's cat would not apply, as it is far more likely that the cat is dead, than that it is alive.

So, I guess we're thinking the the same thing, although it seems that I'm thinking more about influencing a path before you try to confirm the outcome, while you're thinking about influencing a path by trying to confirm the outcome. Right?

...So... now to apply this to Umineko. Gaaaah~

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClockWorkAngel

The problem with Schrödinger’s cat is that though both possibilities are possible theoretically, only the second (death) is possible logically.

The cat will die eventually.

The cat will die one way or another.

So one may assume;

You can only save the cat by opening the box.

...

This is confusing. It seems I can't understand anything unless it's put into a VN-perspective.

Beato's power is to kill someone infinitely, the power of the schrodinger's cat, the ability to trap you into a paradox of possibility, but in reality there's only one reality, death.

That's the power of the "Endless witch" which Beato currently has... though she can give it away.
The power she, herself, has is to make things remember their forms (ie fixing a broken vase or a "broken" Battler).

You misinterpretating a lot of things, CWA.
Beato's power is NOT related at all to the schrodinger's cat theory.

That theory is used to demonstrate that before the conclusion is given, both science and magic sides are right at the same time. It has absolutely nothing to do with Beatrice being able to chain murder people she chooses.

It's my fault for trying to connect things that don't match up things.

If that's true, then technically it would be impossible to find out. It sort of conflicts with her ability too, since its going to be a loop of death and doom, no conclusion will be presented, therefore you HAVE to break the cycle somehow.

It's like higurashi all over again, to win some sorta miracle is going to happen again. I have a feeling Enyu may make a human appearance eventually.

So, I guess we're thinking the the same thing, although it seems that I'm thinking more about influencing a path before you try to confirm the outcome, while you're thinking about influencing a path by trying to confirm the outcome. Right?

The problem with Schrödinger’s cat is that though both possibilities are possible theoretically, only the second (death) is possible logically.

The cat will die eventually.

The cat will die one way or another.

So, in other words, the cat has to die eventually (regardless of the cat living also being a theoretical possibility, along with death) as long as it's stuck as the box. I suppose this would be the case due to the decaying atoms, or whatever it was; as long as it was stuck in the box, there would eventually be a point where an atom decays, whereupon the flask would smash and the cat would die.

So... perhaps, despite Rika/Battler living being a theoretical possibilty, it's set so that they will eventually die- unless they do something?

Quote:

You can only save the cat by opening the box.

The key is not finding whether or not the cat is dead or alive, but guarantee one possibility or another.

Theory is unlimited, while logic is limited in the scope of possibility.

The only way to save the cat- logically, not theoretically- is opening the box- otherwise, it will die. This is the only way to guarantee the 'alive' possibility- however, it needed the influence of 'opening the box' to do so. I guess the same is true for Rika/Battler: the only way to live (logically) is to break free of the samsara/rules (the rules being for Schrodinger's that 'the cat will die when an atom decomposes', which is sort of inevitable, I guess), and they have to guarantee that possibility. However, they have to influence it by wanting to do so.

The way that the theory is phrased is confusing sometimes, though, as it puts it across that by seeking to confirm (guarantee?) whether the cat is alive, one influences it to go in one direction or another. Although I guess if you want to 'guarantee' the cat living, again, the only way is taking it out of the box.

As for the latter part, I guess you could say that this means that the possibilities for magic being the cause are unlimited, and the possibilities for logic being the cause are limited. Which is a fair statement, I would think.

Quote:

Otherwise, I was thinking more along the lines that Schrodinger's cat applies only to, say, the time before the Higurashi reboot (so that Rika has not made any moves on the playing field yet), but after Rika makes her first move, Schrodinger's cat does not apply any more, as her actions would have influenced (yes, that word) the outcome in some way, thus making one "END" (as I call it, eheheh) more likely than the others.

I think this could be the case, too: I guess all of her actions (in order to guarantee that Schrodinger's cat- at least the part where 'the cat will eventually die'- is not true) eventually culminate and help her break free of the 'box'. Is that sort of it...?

... I seem to understand things better in a VN context, too. ._. Or at least one where you can see the situation tree (even though the one in Kizuna still really confuses me)...

Hmm... I think you summed it up pretty well here. I'm going to stop theorizing on Schrodinger's cat. (Now, I'm reading up on Quantum Suicide, which seems to apply a bit more to Higurashi/Umineko [?])

It's kind of obvious that the crime was committed by man, not a witch. If it was committed by a witch, it'd be pretty boring. Of course, after seeing Beato and The Witches (Bern, 34, Walgiria, etc.) so many times, it'd also be almost unbelievable if they ended up being hallucinations or whatever. I'm sure they exist in some form or another, maybe in a state similar to Hanyuu's.

So, maybe Beato works similiar to the way the Sonozakis do. She didn't actually commit the murder, but just because, she lies to Battler and takes the credit for it.

It's kind of obvious that the crime was committed by man, not a witch. If it was committed by a witch, it'd be pretty boring. Of course, after seeing Beato and The Witches (Bern, 34, Walgiria, etc.) so many times, it'd also be almost unbelievable if they ended up being hallucinations or whatever. I'm sure they exist in some form or another, maybe in a state similar to Hanyuu's.

Well the problem is, how do you prove that it's committed by men. until you do that, there's still the claim from Beatrice that it's all done by a witch. According to Ryukishi07's production diary, that is what Umineko has changed to since Ep3: like a court case where the two sides tries to establish their claims. As for hallucinations...remember the premise of Higurashi? The catch phase in the beginning was "Is it men? Or a curse?", and the answer was "neither. It was a disease." So I wouldn't rule out anything just yet...knowing Ryukishi07's writing style in Higurashi...

Well the problem is, how do you prove that it's committed by men. until you do that, there's still the claim from Beatrice that it's all done by a witch. According to Ryukishi07's production diary, that is what Umineko has changed to since Ep3: like a court case where the two sides tries to establish their claims. As for hallucinations...remember the premise of Higurashi? The catch phase in the beginning was "Is it men? Or a curse?", and the answer was "neither. It was a disease." So I wouldn't rule out anything just yet...knowing Ryukishi07's writing style in Higurashi...

That's the very problem, you can't prove it. As in schrodinger's cat, you can't possible find the truth without interfering.

However we may be taking it for too much of its face value. There is no evidence to support that the situation (anti-mystery v anti-fantasy) is limited to the boundaries of schrodinger's cat infact it may only be one way to view it. There can be many ways to interpret the situation.

Well the problem is, how do you prove that it's committed by men. until you do that, there's still the claim from Beatrice that it's all done by a witch. According to Ryukishi07's production diary, that is what Umineko has changed to since Ep3: like a court case where the two sides tries to establish their claims. As for hallucinations...remember the premise of Higurashi? The catch phase in the beginning was "Is it men? Or a curse?", and the answer was "neither. It was a disease." So I wouldn't rule out anything just yet...knowing Ryukishi07's writing style in Higurashi...

Huh... I suppose that's true. Shall I rephrase? It's kind of obvious that the crime was not committed through magical means. There is a logical solution somewhere. But either way, you're right; there's no definite proof that the crime isn't magical. Although Umineko would be pretty boring if the answer was "Beatrice cast a spell, and everyone died magically. The end.".

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClockWorkAngel

What has stayed consistent in the games?

I suppose we can finally give this a try. Anything that happens only once doesn't really matter, anything that happens only twice doesn't really matter either. But something that happens three times. Huh... How about;

-one of the adults get their hands on a pretty awesome shotgun
-one of the adults get their hands on some amount of gold
-one or more new witches appear
-the adults are all (excluding Krauss, I guess) in need of gold
-Kinzo is crazy and delusional
-Kumasawa makes mackerel jokes

The first six died in six seperate locked rooms. The room each contained another room's key, and formed a loop (ie A has B's key, B has C's key...and F has A's key). Also, The servants all had their own masterkeys. Everyone else besides Ginzo was shot, while Ginzo was burned in the boiler roomafter he was killed.

Spoiler for Beatrice's Red Text, loose translations:

-Each servant has 1 master key, and 5 master keys in total.
-By the way, the doors and windows are just normal ones. There is no autolocking doors or ones that doesn't require a key to lock.
-Ginzo, Genji, Shannon, Kanon, Gohda, Kumazawa are all dead!
-There's no one hiding in any of the 6 rooms!
-All Six died instantly! (Dying instantly in this sense is that they were not able to do anything between the time they were being stabbed or whatever and the time they have finally died)
-Besides the victim in the closed room, there is no one else exists in the rooms.
-The six were not killed by traps
-The six were all killed by others. (Refused to recite)
-No one from the six comitted suicide!
-No one from the six died an accidential death! (Stopped by Ronove)

This EP was much more enjoyable than the last 2- it felt shorter but the 中２ type battles... ughh... too much.

I haven't read any post in this thread yet, but I'll probably post a really large theory post again in the next few days especially since I think have a plausible answer to the first part of the riddle. The first six sacrifices are probably: a, i, k, m, r, u
I'll explain my theory in a later post.

BTW did anyone notice that ロノウェ is also how you read Genji's last name 呂ノ上?